Robert Haas wrote: > On Fri, Jul 15, 2011 at 5:37 PM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > Josh Berkus wrote: > >> Alvaro, > >> > >> > It seems that by mentioning some people but not all, you offended both > >> > the people you mentioned (at least some of them, because they are > >> > already actively helping) and those that you didn't (at least some of > >> > them, because they are already actively helping; those that are not > >> > completely inactive in the project, that is). > >> > >> Yeah, everybody's super-touchy this week. ? Must be the weather. > > > > Somehow blaming everyone else doesn't seem like the proper reaction. ?:-( > > I don't think Josh's tone is really the problem we should be worrying > about here. He's pointing out a legitimate problem. If you go back > and look at the CF app for 9.1, you'll see that Tom, Peter, and I > committed the overwhelming majority of the patches which were > submitted to CFs and went on to get committed. So if we have a > CommitFest where Tom is on vacation and Peter is devoting his time to > polishing release N-1 rather than new development on release N, then > we're either going to need a much larger investment of time by one or > more other committers, or we're not really going to get through > everything. When you lose the efforts of somebody who might commit 10 > or 20 patches in a CF and comment usefully on another 10 or 20, it > leaves a big hole.
This mostly revoles around the problem of trying to finalize 9.1 while applying 9.2 patches --- no surprise we don't have enough cycles to do that. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + It's impossible for everything to be true. + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
